Minority Report v Stoke City

I genuinely don’t see us getting promoted but if we did and made low end investment say 10million spend. There would still be a lot left over from the TV money for the group as profit. Relegation might be quite painful but that’s probably the golden ticket rather than selling us on.

 

Maybe, but the wine will be in a pint pot with a handle and the paella between two burger buns.

 

I’ll leave that there. Not much else needs to be said on that.

As for being singled out and picked on, you need to play the game here. You continually write in a condescending manner, with an air of superiority. You refuse to accept this to be the case even when it is pointed out not just by several but by the majority. And yet are quick to complain when anybody calls you out for it or writes in response having been riled by your tone.

It would seem to me that you want special treatment, to have free reign to say what you like and be belittling of the rest of the forum, but to have no response to that element. Essentially it’s a cake and eat it situation.

All that said, no I don’t think you should stop the posts. You enjoy writing them, many, including me, enjoy reading them and the debates they create. Stop playing the victim though. You are clearly an intelligent person so there is no way you aren’t aware of the inflammatory and supercilious tone you often (though not always these days) use.

 

Possibly the first thing you’ve posted that I’ve agreed with.
It’s an interesting problem to have.

My guess is they’d cash in, but who’s a suitable buyer, will they keep the spending sensible? Is it possible to live within your means in the Premiership?

Personally I’d rather have 1 or 2 seasons in the Premiership without overspending that means we can survive post parachute payments.

 

And we don't play solely long balls. Plenty of times last night where we were driven forward by Mowatt and Styles. There was also quite a few occasions where decent passing moves broke down in the final third, which we're used to. But because they broke down, people remember the long balls.

 

Can’t disagree with anything written in the OP.

Yes it unemotional, but I don’t get the issue with someone looking at the game objectively.

What’s more weird is the criticism of not having the same opinion as the majority. Surely the whole point of the BBS is that there is a wide variety of opinion and debate.

 

People keep saying this but that isn't the problem that people are pointing out.

I don't think anyone should be having a crack at his viewpoint- he's perfectly entitled to it and I fully respect it, not for me to believe I am right. It is the way he says it that irks most people.

People then say, "well don't read it then." Maybe I shouldn't, but if someone is being condescending and arrogant on here then it doesn't sit well with me having that go unchallenged. There has to be a mutual respect. He isn't interested in any negative criticism at all. He won't entertain the possibility that he comes across this way, even when challenged by lots of different people. Draw your own conclusions as to why that is.

 

I just like reading the replies missen.

 

So minority report is just writing a negative take on what everyone else sees for tha sake of it?

If we were to win a game 6 or 7 nil and play like Brazil of 1970 would there still be a minority report or is it just written to criticise?

Genuine questions.

 

It's like Wayne Lineker's twitter feed used to be - I'd think 'Christ that's awful' - but then the replies made it.

 

Have you read his reports and his replies before?

He has higher hands than a seven foot tall umpire signalling six.

And he’s anything but objective.

 

Can you point to some specific examples. I do not believe that my report was negative. I wrote about what I saw. Perhaps you saw something different, but I do not see my report as being negative. If you give me some examples, I will tell you how I see it.

 

Can you give me examples of where I was condescending or arrogant. I will then tell you how I see it.

 

Can you give me specific examples of my "condescending manner" or "air of superiority". I you do that, I will tell you about my position on those things

 

Some years ago I had an exchange with RR on here which really frustrated me because of what I thought was his stubbornness, his failure to see my point of view and what I thought was an arrogance and condescending tone on his part. After giving it much thought I recognised that my frustration was actually borne out of the fact that I was being confronted with logic and my emotion was getting in the way. My view has since changed because I think he has actually changed the tone of his posts. Personally I think they are less condescending.

The above is why I've read this thread with great interest. I always read his MRs because, in my opinion, they always give an objective summary of the game. I know some disagree with that, but on here, I would maintain they are the most objective post-match reads you'll find. Devoid of all emotion and bias. On the one hand, I like that because it helps me look back at the game and marry up my attempt at objective thought with RR's. I'm always interested in other people's opinion of a match and RR sometimes point out stuff which I've missed.

On the other hand I still do feel a tad disappointed that he (sorry for talking about you in the third person RR) reveals no emotion in the posts. However the MRs deliver what it says on the tin. They're not about emotion. They're about logical thought and objectivity and a need to better understand tactics. On the emotion thing, as an aside, I'm intrigued by how he celebrates a goal at Oakwell!!

I would miss MR if RR stopped reporting. If I don't like a book I'm reading I stop reading it. If I'm watching something on TV and don't like it I'll switch channels. Based on that logic, if you don't like reading RR's MR then don't read it,. If you do like to read it and engage in debate about what he's written then do that but please don't resort to personal, hurtful criticism. That's just .....not nice; and, generally speaking, this Board is better than that.

Regarding his opinion on Val's tactics I think he's pretty much on the mark. In Big Val's own words we play vertical football. I know some on here would disagree but vertical football actually is hoof-ball. We hoof the ball, out of defence. No fcking about. No tippy tappy. Boot it forward. Not sideways. Not backwards. Boot it forward. However, when it does go forward we get more creative. In the final third we play some lovely football. Fast passing interchange. Good movement off the ball. The press working to perfection. Excellent crosses pinged in by the Callums. Shooting when we have an opportunity. Our set pieces have also markedly improved. I think Jay mentioned on another thread that we're bullying teams that have bullied us in the past. He's right and I love it. In pure footballing terms Danny's team, Heckingbottom's team and Daniel's team were all far more easier on the eye but I don't think any of them were as disciplined, well organised and well drilled as Val's current group. There's no denying that the man is working absolute wonders.

However.......it does take some getting used to. After watching the club for so many years it's really weird watching us play this way. We always used to criticise "teams like" Wimbledon and Stoke for their Route 1 approach. That's us now and may be RR is having the same mental challenge as me (and a few of my mates) in coming to terms with how we now play.

NB - this is not a criticism, it's a genuine surprise seeing us play like this and its an utterly delightful surprise to see this style of play get us to where we currently sit in the table. Two points from safety!!!

Sorry for banging on.

COYR!

 

Carry on RR....I agree sometimes....others not, but they're always interesting.

 

ps this was written before any postings within the last half hour or so.

 

I found this one in particular quickly enough:

 

I haven't got time to go through all your posts but I could find dozens of examples. Here's another where you belittle a fellow poster:

 

As 55&counting has said, there is a less condescending tone around your more recent posts. I have acknowledged that before now myself.

However some earlier iterations of your MR clearly made reference to them being only for people who can think, and very much came across as ‘not for the likes of the general riff raff’.

You have noticeably changed that (presumably for the reason that you were aware of what was happening) - though have never once acknowledged that it existed and so some posters are on the back foot as soon as they read your input.

Having looked back on some of your older MR threads, I’d refer you to some minority reports from earlier this season and especially last season. It isn’t present in all of them, I don’t think it is on this one over and above the apparent assertion that you are better able to look at the game without emotion or bias - when as you admit yourself what you post is just your opinion.

I enjoy your MRs and the threads they create, you don’t deserve all of what is thrown at you, certainly nothing that is personal or abusive, but you have done yourself no favours in the past; and instead of holding your hands up to it in reflection you have repeatedly doubled down, yet have changed the tone on many occasions.

As for how we play, I think it has more skilled play in it than you give us credit for, but that some of the more industrial play is sometimes precipitated by how the opposition look to counter our press (see Cardiff, Stoke, Wycombe games as examples). Though we are a lot more direct under VI, and it has been nothing but a benefit, and the 3-4-3 is a good system, especially now we have some big mobile forwards to select.